« Drink Up, Rich People. Wineboy's Got Places To Be. | Main | Watching the Reruns »




A couple of minor details to quibble about.

1. Setting a timetable for withdraw in the middle of fierce fighting is stupid. Winning the war and turning over most of the country to the elected government and then setting a timetable for withdraw is how wars are supposed to go. The difference is leaving behind a stable, self-sufficient government, or helicopters leaving the roof of the embassy.

2. Yes, properly inflated tires do equate to better gas mileage. However, I'm not 6 years old and I don't need a presidential candidate to make this one of the central points of his energy plan. The moral outrage here is that yet again a politician is basically telling us "I know you are all too stupid to think of this on your own, so here is what you should be doing." I already have a father who taught me these things. What I want is a President who has some policies that may actually help. You know, like actually increasing the supply energy to our country.

3. Obama is certainly brining change to politics. The change being that you cannot question or criticize anything he says without being accused of being a distraction or a racist, which is his response to just about anything said to or about him.

That's pretty salty language in section #3 of your post.
Also, if you are really convinced that tire pressure is a central point of Obama's energy plan you are a testament to the mainstream media's addiction to the soundbyte. John McCain did sing "Bomb, Bomb Iran" but I don't think that is a central point of his foreign poli... oops, I guess I do.

I think, Frank, you're paying too much attention to Republicans, particularly as it pertains to numbers 2 and 3. Air pressure isn't a centerpiece of Obama's energy policy; it was a side note included to put into perspective the small effect that offshore drilling would have -- that would be, by the way, the offshore drilling that is the centerpiece of Republican energy plans. It's a couple of percent, easily and quickly achievable, so that we can get out of the Republican fog and into a serious discussion. Listen to the speech, not to the Republican response. You'll see what I mean. Obama's energy plan is comprehensive and much, much more detailed than anything the McCain campaign has put forward.

As for Number 3, well, I don't know that Obama is raising the race issue very much. He does seem to be a little prickly sometimes, but I don't think it's based on race. Again, listen to what he says, in context, instead of what the republicans say he says. You will find remarkable differences.

I find that in these difficult times I often ask myself, "What would Sean Hannity do"?


Well, we, none of us, know what effect offshore drilling would have since it's prevented by law. These days, just as a reminder, by a Democratically-controlled Congress. So your guesstimates of correlation between the effect of properly inflated tires and offshore drilling is based on nothing but another Obama statement. I could quote guys who have statements that support their other statements, but it's not really a good argument. At least Frank isn't doing a self-referential circle jerk of McCain press releases like you are.

Again, too, I have to point out that it's you socialists who think a President should have an energy policy. Not for one nanosecond would you ever consider the possibility that any instantiation of a President is too damn stupid to have an energy policy. Central planning...you just can't get away from it, can you? Oh well, easier to do "I'm rubber you're glue."

PS Did you hear that a private citizen admitted to adultery today? I wonder why that citizen did that, being wholly unnecessary, per you.

Isn't there a political stance somewhere in between conservative and socialist?

Scott, about your PS--there's nothing to see here, move along....


I spend a great deal of time going through what Obama says; reading his speeches and the like. So far, I'm unimpressed. His positions change almost every day, and he puts so many caveats on everything that he can pretty much get away with doing anything once in office and still be able to claim he's keeping his word.

The energy policy I would like to see from either candidate is this; from this day forward, we're taking off government restrictions on everything. Yes, we still keep environmental issues involved (like what kept any oil from spilling in the gulf during Katrina), but as far as drilling is concerned, get out there and find the oil. At the same time, keep pursuing all those alternative energy sources so we can eventually move away from an oil based economy.

But anyone that tells you that we can do without more oil now is either delusional or a liar. Or maybe both.

As far as #3 is concerned, Obama himself doesn't come out and call anyone racists. After all, that's what he has political surrogates for. But maybe we should be talking to the Clinton team about this, because they were hit with the "if you disagree with Obama you must be a racist" accusation every time they turned around. And if I've heard Obama use the "This is a distraction" line once, I've heard it a thousand times. I just wonder when anything will be anything but a distraction from his ascension to the throne to save us all.

As to Scott's PS. If either candidate goes into the race knowing they have a self-made built-in October surprise it undermines the whole process. The nation has this 9 month long debate on the issues and it comes out that the candidate is severely lacking something called integrity, he has just handed the election to his opponent. All the people who worked for him, gave money and gave him the chance to represent their hopes for the next four years are cheated. McCain had extramarital relations years ago but they were known about by the people who asked him to run for office. The time to stand up and apologize is before you ask people to go out on a limb for you not after you've been busted. If Edwards had gotten the nomination it would now be President McCain, elected without the formality of an election.

"...like what kept any oil from spilling in the gulf during Katrina..."

Um, Frank? The Republican talking point about oil not spilling during Katrina is, um, well, you know: a lie. Considering the oil infrastructure of Louisiana and the Gulf -- and you've got to consider the whole oil infrastructure, since offshore wells do you no good without underwater pipelines and port storage and all of that -- more than 7 million gallons spilled.

According to the Federal Government agency responsible for tracking this kind of thing, there were 124 oil spills from platforms in the Gulf, totaling more than 700,000 gallons. Lest you believe that's insignificant, there are satellite photos of oil slicks so vast that some people believe that the government low-balled the estimates. In all, 113 platforms were destroyed.

All of this went on out in the middle of the Gulf, over the horizon while the media were busy documenting the disaster in New Orleans. This doesn't mean it didn't happen, and it doesn't mean that your Republican talking point "no oil spills from Katrina") is anything but a bald-faced lie.

You might not want to cite that particular statistic in an argument about how none of your arguments come from Republican propaganda.

Oh, and Scott: Please stop calling me a socialist. I'm nothing like a socialist, and every time you call me "socialist" it displays just exactly how far to the loony right you must be. I mean, Squidley thinks I'm a socialist. Is that the company you want to keep?

Please stop calling me a socialist. I'm nothing like a socialist

I'll take you at your word as soon as you quit talking like one.

There's nothing for a President to do in energy policy, except clear the decks for the doers. Maybe, and only maybe, go do some asskissing somewhere so the real producers can come in and produce. The Arabian peninsula would still be camel ranches if not for American oilmen. The Presidential policy, such as it was at the time, was to grease the skids for American industry to what they do best, at the right time in history.

Next, let's talk Presidential policy for education. Or urban sprawl. Or health care.

Did I call you a socialist? I know you support socialist politicians, like your beloved blue-eyed boy Obama, but I don't recall having thought that about you.

But I could very well be wrong. Still, ye shall know them by the company they keep, and all that.

The comments to this entry are closed.